DOES GOD EXIST? TODAY

July 1, 2026June 27, 2026

The Fine-Tuning of the Genetic Code

Yesterday, we examined the fact that the 20 amino acids commonly used in biological proteins are not a random set but are precisely fine-tuned for optimal protein synthesis. But that is only the beginning of the fine-tuning of the genetic code. A series of articles by biologist Dr. Jonathan McLatchie reports on further fine-tuning.

Cell reproduction requires the replication of the DNA contained within those cells. RNA is the molecule that facilitates DNA replication. RNA has 64 different codons–three-letter “words” that are the fundamental units of the genetic code. Of those, 61 specify amino acids that build proteins, and the other three are stop codons that mark the termination point in creating those proteins. As we mentioned before, there are 20 amino acids used for life. Since there are 64 codons, “a marvel of molecular logic” selects the proper amino acids. That coding system shows evidence of a conscious, deliberate, intelligent agent guiding the creation of the genetic code.

The genetic code in living cells seems to be beautifully fine-tuned to protect cells from mutations during replication. As reported by Dr. McLatchie, the statistical rarity of the conventional genetic code is 1 in 2 billion. That does not seem to be a random chance occurrence. But there are additional levels of fine-tuning, including the fact that the genetic code has been written to reduce the impact of frameshift mutations. It’s beyond the scope of this article to discuss what frameshift mutations are, but the point is that the 64-to-20 mapping system is designed to minimize the number of amino acids translated from a frameshifted transcript before a stop codon halts the process.

But that does not fully cover the fine-tuning of the genetic code. It has multiple layers of highly optimized, independent constraints. The genetic code has been established and used by all forms of life on this planet, with each of the 20 amino acids tied to specific codons. Making significant modifications to the code would create major problems in every cell because the relationships between codons and amino acids are essential for every polypeptide (protein) the cell makes.

Dr. McLatchie’s report contains this statement: “Why is the genetic code the way it is, and how did it come to be? That was asked over 50 years ago, at the dawn of molecular biology, (and) might remain pertinent even in another 50 years.” The point I make is that until scientists consider the possibility of an intelligent Agent who designed the genetic code, that question will never be answered. Why not at least consider the possibility that all these signs of the fine-tuning of the genetic code are not merely accidental but the product of design? The reason modern science refuses to do so is that design requires an intelligent Designer.

Reference: scienceandculture.com HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE

June 30, 2026June 26, 2026

The Amino Acid Set Was Fine-Tuned for Life

Organic compounds are large molecules containing carbon and having carbon-hydrogen or carbon-carbon bonds. Many organic compounds are involved in life, and life as we know it could not exist without carbon. One group of organic compounds, known as amino acids, numbers at least 500. Of those, only 20 (or, in some cases, 22) are used in plants and animals. Why and how were these amino acids selected to make living things? Amazingly, the amino acid set was fine-tuned for life.

There are three possibilities for how they could have been “selected.” The selection could have been due to chance, with no intelligent agent involved. It could have been because of necessity, meaning that some kind of law could allow only those amino acids to be selected. The third possibility is selection by an intelligent agent with a purpose. Did this apparent choice happen because of mere chance or because of laws that required no other choice? No known laws required this selection, and chance seems questionable since the choice appears to be perfect.

With many alternatives, why this 20? Would any 20 out of the 500 work just as well? The answer is “No,” according to a research paper published in the journal Astrobiology, titled “Did Evolution Select a Nonrandom Alphabet of Amino Acids?” by Gayle K. Philip and Stephen J. Freeland. They wrote, “Random chance would be highly unlikely to represent the chemical space of possible amino acids with such breadth and evenness in charge, size, and hydrophobicity (properties that define what protein structures and functions can be built).” In other words, these 20 amino acids represent the best choice. You can say that the amino acid set was fine-tuned for life.

We have often talked about the cosmic creation event (“big bang”), the laws of physics, the physical constants, and the fundamental forces of nature as having been fine-tuned for life. It appears that the amino acid set was fine-tuned for life. The amino acids that make up the proteins in our bodies seem to be optimally selected. They must have been selected by an agent with the wisdom and power to design a complex, finely tuned, information-rich system, which we call life. We suggest that the agent is the God of the Bible. Tomorrow, we will examine more fine-tuning within our DNA.

References: scienceandculture.com

June 29, 2026June 23, 2026

The Whites of the Eyes

“Don’t shoot till you see the whites of their eyes!” That was an order given by Colonel William Prescott to the Colonial soldiers at the Battle of Bunker Hill during the American Revolution. The reason for the order was not to get close to the British soldiers to get to know them, but because the Colonial Army was low on ammunition and Prescott wanted to make sure it wasn’t wasted. Seeing the whites of the eyes may be dangerous in warfare, but it’s valuable for communication.

Human eyes come in various colors, such as blue, brown, or green, but that refers to the iris. The area surrounding the iris is called the sclera. In humans, the sclera is white, or at least close to white. That makes us different from other animals, since most mammals have dark eyes. The question is, why are the whites of the eyes the way they are?

In 1997, Shiro Kohshima, a Japanese biologist at Kyoto University, compared the eyes of primates and found that only humans had white in their eyes. He proposed that the white sclera helps us communicate because the contrast between the white and the dark pupils makes it easier to tell where someone is looking. Parents can often tell if their child is telling the truth by whether the child is looking at the parent. When someone looks away, it may mean they are hiding something. The whites of the eyes tend to draw our attention away. When someone looks us directly in the eye, it helps us to bond with that person. Thus, the white sclera helps us communicate or avoid communicating.

In 2007, Michael Tomasello, a psychologist at Duke University, expanded on Kohshima’s theory, developing a cooperative eye hypothesis. He said that the whites of the eyes help us determine what someone is focused on because we are sensitive to where a person is looking. Tomasello conducted experiments on human infants, gorillas, chimpanzees, and bonobos. He did this by looking at the ceiling with only his eyes, only his head, or both, to see how humans and primates would react.

Tomasello found that human infants followed the researcher’s eye direction three times more often when he glanced toward the ceiling with his eyes only than when he tilted his head upward with his eyes closed. He found that the primates did the opposite. For them, following the head movement was more important than following eye movement.

From an early age, humans are very sensitive to eye contact. Within the first few days, babies looked longer at faces that were directed at them. In two to four months, babies learn to follow where others are looking. You can hold the attention of babies by looking directly at them. When the parent looks at an object and names it, this helps the infant connect the name to the object, improving language skills.

Even though some people’s eyes are not as white as others’ due to age, health, or race, humans do show more of the sclera than other animals do. Experiments with humans and chimpanzees indicate that the whites of the eyes enable both humans and chimpanzees to better determine the gaze direction of humans than that of chimpanzees.

The bottom line is that humans have more white in their eyes, giving our eyes greater contrast that draws attention to where we are looking, helps us communicate, helps infants learn language terms, helps us determine the status of someone’s health, and helps us to bond with someone we care about. We can be thankful that God has given humans this exceptional gift, but it may not have been an important factor in helping the Americans win the Revolutionary War.

Reference: popsci.com

June 26, 2026June 23, 2026

The Euphrates River

“A river watering the garden (of Eden) flowed from Eden, and from there it divided; it had four headstreams. The name of the first is the Pishon … the name of the second river is the Gihon … the name of the third river is the Tigris … and the fourth river is the Euphrates.” (Genesis 2:10-14)

Skeptics have maintained that everything in the Genesis account is a myth with no evidential support. Now, seismic imaging can create 2D and 3D maps of the Fertile Crescent’s subsurface using sound waves reflected by rock layers beneath the ground. The technique is similar to using ultrasound to create a detailed image of a baby in the womb. The maps can show the land and the Euphrates River as they were in biblical times.

We now know that the Euphrates River was as the Bible describes it. The Euphrates was the longest river in southwest Asia, flowing some 1,700 miles. It originated in present-day Turkey and flowed through Mesopotamia before emptying into the Persian Gulf. It flowed by Babylon and the ancient city of Uruk in present-day Iraq. Uruk was the world’s first metropolis and the birthplace of written language.

In today’s world, the Fertile Crescent has changed due to seismic activity and political turmoil. Dr. Simon Lang from the University of Western Australia, working with a petroleum company, used sensitive seismic tools to trace the origin of the Euphrates River to two ancient rivers in Turkey.

The claim that there is no evidential support for the Genesis account is simply not true. As more technological tools become available, the credibility of the Biblical account will increase. You can read your Bible and have confidence in what it tells you. You can also be confident that obeying what it tells you for eternal life is true.

Reference: msn.com

June 25, 2026June 22, 2026

Underground Fungal Networks

We often take for granted that plants grow just about anywhere. However, as more research is done on our planet’s fauna, we get a clearer picture of what plant growth requires. Underground fungal networks sustain virtually all plant life on our planet.

Scientists have discovered gigantic underground fungal networks that connect plants and store vast amounts of carbon in the soil. Known as mycorrh i zal fungi, they partner with the world’s plants, supplying water and nutrients in exchange for sugars produced through photosynthesis. These networks span some 68 quadrillion miles underground and make the plant life we depend on possible.

The Genesis account simply says that God created vegetation (Genesis 1:11). It does not explain the complexity of plants and their networks that enable them to survive the variations in climate and soils on planet Earth. We know more about what it took to create the conditions for the plants that supply us with food. The magnitude of mycorrhizal fungi is hard to comprehend and beyond any chance explanation. God’s wisdom, power, and intelligence are a testimony to our Creator.

Reference: earthweek.com

June 24, 2026June 22, 2026

Jumping Spider Eyes

Many scientific and technological advances are inspired by the study of animals and plants. Spiders have long inspired innovations, especially related to their silk and web-making. A new development, however, is based on the design of jumping spider eyes.

Jumping spiders (family Salticidae) leap quickly to avoid predators, capture prey, or simply move around. They need good 3D vision to judge distances when they jump. Unlike human eyes, which have only one retina, jumping spider eyes can’t move, but they have multiple retinal layers. These layers capture the image with slightly different focus. Their poppy seed-sized brains then process the images, comparing differences in sharpness to compute the distance to an object.

A computer scientist at Northwestern University, Emma Alexander, and her colleagues have created an extremely efficient 3D camera dubbed a “SpiderCam.” They presented their project on June 7, 2026, at the Computer Vision Foundations Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition in Denver, Colorado. The SpiderCam perceives depth the same way that jumping spider eyes do, by capturing images on two layers of “retinas” with very slight differences in focus. A computer algorithm embedded in a custom chip processes and compares the images to calculate depth and distance. This SpiderCam uses less than a Watt of power to create real-time 3-dimensional images.

Possible uses for the SpiderCam include field recording, where capturing a 3D image with minimal power is essential. It could also be used in augmented reality applications where a person interfaces with the physical world and needs precise location information about surrounding objects.

The advantage of the camera based on jumping spider eyes is that it uses less energy and less expensive hardware than other 3D cameras. Humans continue to learn from animals, and as we discover God’s designs in nature, we can apply them in biomimicry to solve problems in technology and everyday life.

Reference: popsci.com

June 23, 2026June 22, 2026

Seed Dispersal by Ants

Myrmecochory is the term for seed dispersal by ants. Scientists estimate that as many as 11,000 to 23,000 plant species worldwide use myrmecochory to disperse their seeds. Most of the plants that use myrmecochory attach food bodies rich in lipids, amino acids, and other nutrients to their seeds. These food bodies are called elaiosomes, and they exist only to entice ants to take the seeds.

The seed with an elaiosome attached is called a diaspore. When ant workers forage for food, they collect diaspores and carry them back to the colony, where they remove the elaiosome and feed it to their larvae. Then the ants dispose of the seed underground. In this way, the ants move the seeds some distance away from the original plant and leave them where they can germinate and grow into new plants.

This is a mutual arrangement, a symbiosis, between the plants and the ants. The plants gain greater seed dispersal distance. They also get directed dispersal, with seeds underground, where they can germinate and grow, safe from seed predators. The ants get nutritious food as their part of the deal. The plant gives up some vital nutrients in exchange for seed dispersal by ants.

Thousands of different plant species are willing to sacrifice some of their nutrition to entice ants to disperse their seeds to places where they are likely to grow. Evolutionary scientists suggest that these plants independently evolved this trait for survival. The term they use for unrelated species independently evolving similar characteristics is “convergent evolution.” The living system involves many cases of so-called convergent evolution.

We could believe that thousands of unrelated species independently evolved the same technique for seed dispersal by ants. We could also see this as evidence that the Designer of all living things designed this system. Which explanation seems more reasonable?

Reference: Wikipedia.com

June 22, 2026June 21, 2026

Fine-Tuning Explanation

Roberto Fumagalli is a Senior Lecturer in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at King’s College London. Some months ago, he wrote an article in the Journal for General Philosophy of Science arguing that the fine-tuning of the laws and constants of our universe that makes life possible is real and requires a non-chance-based explanation. In other words, chance is not an adequate fine-tuning explanation for the existence of life. We have argued before that the universe is fine-tuned for intelligent life.

Fumagalli summarizes his argument as follows:

1- The universe is fine-tuned for intelligent life.

2- The probability of fine-tuning is not consistent with chance.

3- Therefore, fine-tuning calls for a non-chance-based explanation.

Scientists widely acknowledge that there is at least some fine-tuning of the parameters and laws of the universe and that it is not trivial. However, some critics seek to cast doubt on the need for fine-tuning, saying that we don’t know what other forms of advanced life might be possible. In other words, we only know of carbon-based life, but some suggest there may be other forms in which intelligent life could flourish. However, only very specific combinations of parameter values would permit the chemical complexity required for intelligent life. Therefore, the fine-tuning explanation does not support the possibility that chance is the cause.

The values of at least some of the fundamental parameters of the universe are very unlikely to fall within the range that permits intelligent life. Only an exceedingly narrow range of parameter values would allow life, especially advanced intelligent life. So, what are the possible fine-tuning explanations for the laws of physics and the relationships between the various forces?

One explanation is chance, but that does not seem very plausible. Another explanation is the multiple-universe theory proposed by some scientists. That would require a multitude of universes with different parameters, and we just happen to be the lucky ones in the one universe that allows life to exist. That is not a scientifically testable hypothesis, and it would require a fine-tuned, multi-universe-generating device. Another possibility is some unknown physics that scientists have not yet discovered, but that would also have to be fine-tuned.

The one fine-tuning explanation that seems by far the most acceptable, the most supportive of the evidence, is that our universe is the product of cosmic design by an infinite intelligence, namely the God of the Bible.

Reference: scienceandculture.com

June 18, 2026June 17, 2026

Two Nostrils Are Better Than One

Have you ever thought about why you have two nostrils? When you need to take in more air during strenuous exercise, mouth breathing becomes necessary. But breathing through your nose is much better than breathing through your mouth for various reasons. When I have had a cold or allergy and one nostril was plugged, the other still worked, at least partially. That could be the reason for two nostrils. But that’s not the whole story of why two nostrils are better than one.

It may be a surprise to you, as it was to me, that even when your nostrils are not plugged, one of them will always draw in more air than the other. They trade off every few hours. Your nostrils prepare the air for your lungs by warming it and adding moisture. When the nostril that has been passing most of the air becomes dry, the other can take over while the first one recovers moisture.

A second reason two nostrils are better than one is more efficient fragrance detection. We detect smells when odorant molecules dissolve in the nasal mucus, where they bind to neurons that send signals to the brain. Some chemicals are quickly absorbed, while others are absorbed more slowly. The nostril with faster airflow will detect odor chemicals that dissolve quickly, while the nostril with slower airflow will have time to detect slow-dissolving chemicals. The brain combines the two fragrances to give us a more complete picture of the environmental smells.

Perhaps another reason two nostrils are better than one is that they help detect the direction smells are coming from. Our ears on opposite sides of our heads can give us information about the direction of sound. Our brains combine the vision from our two eyes to give us a three-dimensional view of the world around us. Even though the nostrils are not as far apart as our ears and eyes, they can still give us a clue to determine the origin of a smell.

Your nostrils contain hairs that filter out some of the dust and pollutants in the air. That is another advantage over mouth breathing. One more thing that comes to mind is that having two nostrils allows a ridge of cartilage to form between them, giving your nose its distinctive shape. (Although you may not think that the shape of your nose is advantageous.) Overall, I have to admit that two nostrils are better than one. I am glad the Creator made that part of the body’s marvelous design.

Reference: popsci.com

June 17, 2026June 16, 2026

Sensing Up and Down

How do you tell the difference between up and down? Vision helps, but blind people still know up from down. We sense gravity mostly through our inner ear. Sensory hairs inside the inner ear are stimulated by small calcium carbonate crystals. As we move, those crystals brush against the hairs, sending electrical signals through our nervous system to the brain. The brain interprets the signals, thus sensing up and down.

We know that plants can determine up and down because, no matter which direction you plant the seed, the roots grow down as the stalk goes up. How does the plant know which direction to grow without a brain or nervous system?

Since ancient times, people have known that plants grow upward while their roots grow downward, but they didn’t know why. Plant growth is controlled by hormones, and the primary one affecting growth is auxin. Plants have specialized organelles known as amyloplasts that enable gravitropism, the ability to sense up and down.

Most plants have heavy amyloplasts at the tips of their roots, where they settle in response to gravity. The amyloplasts trigger the production of auxin. When higher levels of auxin are produced on the lower side of plant roots, the lower side grows downward in the direction of gravity.

A mysterious part of this system is that amyloplasts do not produce auxin. It is produced in another set of cells that are physically distant from the amyloplasts. Without a system of nerves connecting the amyloplasts and the auxin-producing cells, how does the directional information get to the auxin-producing cells? Scientists have not fully answered that question, but they are working on it. The Creator knows.

Auxin is also the major hormone causing plants to grow upward toward light. Phototropins are pigments that sense light and trigger the production of auxin at the tips of the shoots. The auxin is transported to the bottom side of the stem, where it stimulates growth and causes the stem to grow upward toward the light.

Sensing up and down, and many other functions of plants, are carried out without the benefit of a brain or central nervous system. We may think of plants as simple compared to animals, but they must be very complex to accomplish what animals do (including taking in nourishment, defending themselves, and reproducing) without being able to move from where they are planted. The design of living things, both animals and plants, shows that there is an intelligent Designer.